Related articles and links |  1 of 3

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
—Ephesians 6:12

The November 25 issue of The New York Times included a story headlined "24 Cow Clones, All Normal, Are Reported by Scientists: A Challenge to Arguments Against Human Cloning." The 24 fine cows, according to scientists at Advanced Cell Technology in Worcester, Massachusetts, "are normal in every way."

The Times story, by veteran science writer Gina Kolata, notes that one of the reasons many scientists have opposed human cloning is the high rate of defects among clones. And indeed, she goes on to report, to produce those 24 allegedly perfect specimens, Advanced Cell Technology created no fewer than 500 clones, of which only 30 survived to birth, and of those only 24 to adulthood.

Nevertheless, the researcher who directed the project, Dr. Robert Lanza, isn't shy about the implications of his work. A proposed ban on human cloning passed the House but stalled in the Senate last summer and was put on the back burner after September 11. The 24 cows, Lanza claims, render the proposal moot. After all, such legislation was "fueled by" the "desire to portray human cloning as dangerous and irresponsible." But now, he says, "it's important to put some science in here, some reality."

Ah, Science. Ah, Reality. But wait a minute. Today Dr. Lanza is back in the Times in another story by Kolata: "Company Says It Produced Human Embryo Clones." The clones were produced in October: "Most died within a day or so," Kolata writes. "Six lasted for five days." But the announcement was made only yesterday, three days after the announcement of the "normal" cow clones. In short, it becomes clear that the story of the defect-free cows was released to pave the way for the release of today's story. (Question: Was Kolata aware of this when she wrote the story that appeared on Friday?) And Dr. Lanza's assessment of the human embryo cloning? "These are exciting preliminary results."

When your cat has kittens, the children crowd around. Looking over their shoulders, you're struck by the way each kitten in the litter is already distinct from the others. That calico one is feisty; this one, with a Siamese hue, isn't getting enough milk. One kitten seems not to be moving at all.

The funeral is held in the back yard; the grave lies beneath the branches of the plum tree. That bundle of life is gone for good.

A cat is buried; a person is buried. Is there any essential difference?

At a large state university, a professor is fired after an uproar over comments he made in class. According to his critics, he employed racist stereotypes. Across the campus, in another building, a distinguished professor of cognitive science is lecturing to a packed house. Human beings, he says, quoting Marvin Minsky, are machines made of meat. The students dutifully write that down.

"Physical composition and cultural disposition were confused in Chinese antiquity," Frank Dikotter tells us in his book The Discourse of Race in Modern China:

The border between man and animal was blurred. "The Rong are birds and beasts." This was not simply a derogatory description: it was part of a mentality that integrated the concept of civilization with the idea of humanity, picturing the alien groups living outside the pale of Chinese society as distant savages hovering on the edge of bestiality. The names of the outgroups were written in characters with an animal radical, a habit that persisted until the 1930s: the Di, a northern tribe, were thus assimilated with the dog, whereas the Man and the Min, people from the south, shared the attributes of the reptiles. The Qiang had a sheep radical.

next page... |  1 of 3

November (Web-only) 2001, Vol. 45